Why does the Katyusha fire only one salvo and is emptied? Are all rocket launchers in SP:WAW like this? And as I understand it, to reload anything, an ammo truck has to be in the same hex at the end of your turn right? I'm not so clear on this though, :
How many times can 1 ammo truck reload the said Katyusha?? (for example)?
Is the ammo truck carrying unlimited ammo (hence it just has to stay in the hex with the Katyusha the whole battle) or is it 1 reload/ truck?? And what about for other units??
And what's the most effective mortar out there? I find German 120mm's to be pretty good... Do they give more suppression than the 105mm howitzer? What about the 25 lb. gun, it seems to be firing a shell that's lighter than the 120mm.
Question on Rockets & on Mortars
Moderator: MOD_SPWaW
Question on Rockets & on Mortars
Decoy, Invite, Entrap, Destroy.
Most rockets are one shot -- at least the on-board variety. Placing the Ammo truck next to them will reload them throughout the course of the game, but rocks are a slow load. If you have mobile launchers, I would suggest a stationary ammo dump and drive the artillery around to reload as needed. The reason is that on-board artillery leaves a smoke cloud and leaving them in one place too long gets you tagged.
If you can turn off the tubes individually (as with gun batteries) you can extend the firing life of the system by using less rounds per salvo. Figure that a close hit by a 122 rocket in the middle of an infantry formation can do considerable chaos to a platoon. A few extra and you reach a point where the reload time is hardly worth the extra damage.
An ammo truck or dump will reload all day long. You can even drive up and reload other units as needed. More units, larger shells, etc. slow down the reload time, but the truck doesn't run out of reloads.
I like the 81 mm, the 120 mm, and even the 50 mm in the mortar catagory. While the 120 gets more kills, the 81 gets good suppression and the occassional kill or three. The 50s are quite portable making them able to keep up with the infantry as it advances. The 81s move slowly by foot, but two fit easily into a medium truck. I'm not sure about the 120's mobility as I don't remember ever having them on board.
"Best" is a variable quality at best. Big bore weapons make big holes and cause casualties but have much fewer shots and move slowly if at all. The smaller guns don't do as many casualties, but keep up the fire longer and can move with the front line if needed. Best is determined more by the tactical situation than be objective measurements of warhead size, range and number of rounds.
That said: My personal favorite is the German PzGdr Inf Co, which comes with a squad of 3 - 50mm mortars, a pair of 81 mm mortars, as well as an infantry gun section of either 75, 105, or 150 mm (your choice by availability). To this I add at least one off-board battalion (three batteries) of 150 or 105 and most of my basic artillery needs are met. Whether I spend more to build up more artillery is up to the situation.
If you can turn off the tubes individually (as with gun batteries) you can extend the firing life of the system by using less rounds per salvo. Figure that a close hit by a 122 rocket in the middle of an infantry formation can do considerable chaos to a platoon. A few extra and you reach a point where the reload time is hardly worth the extra damage.
An ammo truck or dump will reload all day long. You can even drive up and reload other units as needed. More units, larger shells, etc. slow down the reload time, but the truck doesn't run out of reloads.
I like the 81 mm, the 120 mm, and even the 50 mm in the mortar catagory. While the 120 gets more kills, the 81 gets good suppression and the occassional kill or three. The 50s are quite portable making them able to keep up with the infantry as it advances. The 81s move slowly by foot, but two fit easily into a medium truck. I'm not sure about the 120's mobility as I don't remember ever having them on board.
"Best" is a variable quality at best. Big bore weapons make big holes and cause casualties but have much fewer shots and move slowly if at all. The smaller guns don't do as many casualties, but keep up the fire longer and can move with the front line if needed. Best is determined more by the tactical situation than be objective measurements of warhead size, range and number of rounds.
That said: My personal favorite is the German PzGdr Inf Co, which comes with a squad of 3 - 50mm mortars, a pair of 81 mm mortars, as well as an infantry gun section of either 75, 105, or 150 mm (your choice by availability). To this I add at least one off-board battalion (three batteries) of 150 or 105 and most of my basic artillery needs are met. Whether I spend more to build up more artillery is up to the situation.
Challenge
War is unhealthy for die-stamped cardboard and other paper products.
War is unhealthy for die-stamped cardboard and other paper products.
I find the concept of limited Ammo in SPWAW a real stretch. Why not limited food, water, or limited POL (petrol, oil) etc.
As I have mentioned before, presumably a well prepared attack is, errr, well prepared, meaning they don't send out a company or battalion with only what they are carrying. We don't have support troops like field kitchens, intelligence, fuel dumps, field laundries, hospitals, and the hundreds of other services logistical troops provide so why do we have ammo trucks or dumps? We presume that all other logistical functions operate properly or at least minimally in the background, so why shouldn't ammo supply operate just as well.
I can see having limited ammo on in special cases, for a specific scenario perhaps, but as a general rule, it seems ridiculous. There is certainly enuf micro-managing in spwaw without it.
Certainly Monty never started an offensive or held a line without carefully preparing his logistical tail. Huge numbers of GA units were abandoned because of logistical problems (lack of POL, for instance) during the entire western front campaign that I have read about and I am sure this was also true for the Eastern front.
So, I hope I made my case for Limited Ammo OFF. Comments?
As I have mentioned before, presumably a well prepared attack is, errr, well prepared, meaning they don't send out a company or battalion with only what they are carrying. We don't have support troops like field kitchens, intelligence, fuel dumps, field laundries, hospitals, and the hundreds of other services logistical troops provide so why do we have ammo trucks or dumps? We presume that all other logistical functions operate properly or at least minimally in the background, so why shouldn't ammo supply operate just as well.
I can see having limited ammo on in special cases, for a specific scenario perhaps, but as a general rule, it seems ridiculous. There is certainly enuf micro-managing in spwaw without it.
Certainly Monty never started an offensive or held a line without carefully preparing his logistical tail. Huge numbers of GA units were abandoned because of logistical problems (lack of POL, for instance) during the entire western front campaign that I have read about and I am sure this was also true for the Eastern front.
So, I hope I made my case for Limited Ammo OFF. Comments?
The error in some of this thinking, however, is that yes--IRL, if you have your mortars firing constantly as fast as they can, they're going to run out of ammo soon. And no, you don't always have ammo support coming up from behind. You could simulate this very well by calling in ammo truck reinforcements, actually. After all, you don't put these things on the front lines (they make juicy targets), which most all scenarios are. This isn't just a concern for arty. Small arms ammo can weigh a LOT (part of the reason NATO switched from 7.62mm to 5.56mm). Especially with automatic weapons, if you fire as much and fast as you can... you'll be out of ammo in short order. Same with tanks--actually, Wild Bill has a copy of some radio logs of tankers in the Pacific (on the Raiders' new site), and the commander of the unit hollers at his men for wasting ammo when they blew up an abandoned MG with an HE round. Finally, using unlimited ammo removes one of the few things that's realistically modelled with Special Ops troops in SPWAW: Interdiction.
My $0.02, American.
My $0.02, American.
-
Capt. Pixel
- Posts: 1178
- Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Tucson, AZ
I think you are still missing my point. In other war games, units not having a line-of-supply (for instance a surrounded unit) have increased attrition and decreased offensive capability. In SPWAW we dont have an analogous mechanism using zones of control. But for thise units WITH a line of supply, presumably, all logistical support should continue to flow in the background.
So I guess the point I am making is that as long as a SPWAW unit is not 'cut-off' it should have 'limited ammo off'. For instance, a rear area rocket battery would be unlikely to have only ONE salvo on hand in real life if it was detailed to support an offensive or provide arty defense for a static defensive line. This is just not realistic. When you see pictures of arty parks, there are HUGE piles of spent shell casings. Thousands of rounds expended.
Regarding the effectiveness of aircraft, arty and rockets, h*ll, they WERE effective in real life. Most casualties in WWII were not from ground pounders or tanks, they were from arty. Anyway, limited ammo ON works for BOTH sides, not just one.
The point I am trying to make is that SPWAW says other logistical support is assumed to work properly in the background so why should ammo supply be any different ? The assumption is correct or incorrect but cannot or should not be true for one and false for the other.
So I guess the point I am making is that as long as a SPWAW unit is not 'cut-off' it should have 'limited ammo off'. For instance, a rear area rocket battery would be unlikely to have only ONE salvo on hand in real life if it was detailed to support an offensive or provide arty defense for a static defensive line. This is just not realistic. When you see pictures of arty parks, there are HUGE piles of spent shell casings. Thousands of rounds expended.
Regarding the effectiveness of aircraft, arty and rockets, h*ll, they WERE effective in real life. Most casualties in WWII were not from ground pounders or tanks, they were from arty. Anyway, limited ammo ON works for BOTH sides, not just one.
The point I am trying to make is that SPWAW says other logistical support is assumed to work properly in the background so why should ammo supply be any different ? The assumption is correct or incorrect but cannot or should not be true for one and false for the other.
I agree with this; off-board Arty should be assumed to have ammo support.Originally posted by bigtroutz
So I guess the point I am making is that as long as a SPWAW unit is not 'cut-off' it should have 'limited ammo off'. For instance, a rear area rocket battery would be unlikely to have only ONE salvo on hand in real life if it was detailed to support an offensive or provide arty defense for a static defensive line. This is just not realistic. When you see pictures of arty parks, there are HUGE piles of spent shell casings. Thousands of rounds expended.
Ammo runs out more quickly, for one? ^_^; I see your point, I just disagree. I can see fuel being limited--I'd actually love to see it, those kitties wouldn't be so tough (especially if you added the frequent breakdowns of the bigger ones). Food... eh, not really. In the scope and span of each scenario, no way at all (what, you can't carry a candy bar and a canteen??? that's all you need for one day (though yes you'll be exhausted by the end of the day)).Originally posted by bigtroutz
The point I am trying to make is that SPWAW says other logistical support is assumed to work properly in the background so why should ammo supply be any different ? The assumption is correct or incorrect but cannot or should not be true for one and false for the other.
-
Belisarius
- Posts: 3099
- Joined: Sat May 26, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
- Contact:
I don't follow your logic. We can assume that tanks etc. are as filled up as they can be prior to battle, which means PLENTY to run around with on fields as small as the WAW ones. Or we can assume that they DON'T have a ready supply of fuel. But then again, you might not have supplies of rations and candy bars either - and then starvation should count as well.Originally posted by Irinami
I agree with this; off-board Arty should be assumed to have ammo support.
Ammo runs out more quickly, for one? ^_^; I see your point, I just disagree. I can see fuel being limited--I'd actually love to see it, those kitties wouldn't be so tough (especially if you added the frequent breakdowns of the bigger ones). Food... eh, not really. In the scope and span of each scenario, no way at all (what, you can't carry a candy bar and a canteen??? that's all you need for one day (though yes you'll be exhausted by the end of the day)).
My view? I think it's good as it is. But one could assume that at least the offboard rockets has ammo support. OB arty shells were limited in 7.1, as having 150mm OB fire through the game takes to much of the fun away. but just _one_ salvo with Katyushas/Nebelwerfers is silly.
I'll shut up now :p
Got StuG?
This conversation reminds me of Eastern Front, 1942. The Germans over-produced 75mm Guns and underproduced the ammo. They were so desperate for ammo that gunners had orders to fire 50mm flank shots if at all possible and only fire the 75mm guns as a last resort.
One gun sergeant was reprimanded for using too many 75mm rounds to destroy an entire platoon of T34's.
I have always wanted fuel that functions like limited ammo. That might force the appearance of horse-drawn AT guns, etc.
BTW, an ammo truck does NOT need to be in the same hex as the weapon it is loading. It must, however, be in the next hex. A single truck can supply several weapons at the same time if it is clustered with say, a platoon of mortars. It is too bad that they have an infinite amount of rounds available.
The German and other light mortars, I use them and like them. But they can be tough to use in certain terrain. They are great little suppressers in cities where they can fire from hidden positions within range.
One gun sergeant was reprimanded for using too many 75mm rounds to destroy an entire platoon of T34's.
I have always wanted fuel that functions like limited ammo. That might force the appearance of horse-drawn AT guns, etc.
BTW, an ammo truck does NOT need to be in the same hex as the weapon it is loading. It must, however, be in the next hex. A single truck can supply several weapons at the same time if it is clustered with say, a platoon of mortars. It is too bad that they have an infinite amount of rounds available.
The German and other light mortars, I use them and like them. But they can be tough to use in certain terrain. They are great little suppressers in cities where they can fire from hidden positions within range.
I agree, Redleg, that if you wish to model a situation of poor supply, you should turn limited ammo ON, and I made that point. Hey, all we arguing about is that it eventually turned out Germany bit off more than they could chew when they invaded SU. Certainly they had plenty of ammo when Barbarossa STARTED.
But how about the more USUAL situation when supply is adequate or plentiful ? Offensive's were rarely started without ensuring ammo supplies and other logistics were adequate or plentiful. Certainly one of the major reasons that the US army was successful was their successful logistical support, not their fabulous tanks
When I examine the SU use of arty in detail, I am amazed at the number of tubes and rounds expended at the start of offensives. I am sure that the GA didn't think these barrages were much 'fun'.
However, I agree that if we want to ensure play balance, arty needs to be much more limited than it would have been in real life, in many situations. The expedient of limiting the number of tubes to a certain percentage of the total purchase seems like a good compromise. NOT limited ammo ON, but limited availability....unrealistic but necessary because of the effectiveness of the weapon.
But how about the more USUAL situation when supply is adequate or plentiful ? Offensive's were rarely started without ensuring ammo supplies and other logistics were adequate or plentiful. Certainly one of the major reasons that the US army was successful was their successful logistical support, not their fabulous tanks
When I examine the SU use of arty in detail, I am amazed at the number of tubes and rounds expended at the start of offensives. I am sure that the GA didn't think these barrages were much 'fun'.
However, I agree that if we want to ensure play balance, arty needs to be much more limited than it would have been in real life, in many situations. The expedient of limiting the number of tubes to a certain percentage of the total purchase seems like a good compromise. NOT limited ammo ON, but limited availability....unrealistic but necessary because of the effectiveness of the weapon.
The food analogy doesn't hold up, and I'n not sure how unlimited ammo can be considered "realistic." Allow me to ramble... :rolleyes:
This is an estimate, but the amount of time spent in the average game is such that food is not an issue. A fully loaded infantryman can sustain an average speed of about 4 mph for an extended period of time. At 50 yds/hex a mile is about 35 hexes. Since a squad crosses about 4 clear terrain hexes per turn (and is shown moving 4 mph at that rate) we can estimate that it will spend 8.8 (round to 9) turns to move one mile -- therefor 8 to 10 turns is equal to 15 minutes! A 36 to 40 turn game is about one hour long. Just how many times will you need to eat in that time frame?
Ammo availability, on the other hand is a function of how much you can carry. Limitations are set for all the different units and in the space of one hour, firing constantly, you can empty what you have on hand fairly quickly. Replenishing the personal supply is an issue of getting to where there is more. I rarely have infantry units run out of all their ammo: grenades, smoke, etc, yes, but hardly ever do I run out of basic bullets.
AFVs do run out periodiclly, just as they did in RL, because they have limited storage space. Artillery, however, is something I have wondered about myself. Thing is, the off-board stuff is in the backfield and should have access to a considerable amount of ammo. In this I agree with bigtroutz and others -- I just can't see why you would assign an Artty battery to support an attack and then say you only get 50 rounds. I don't know how this works in RL since I have never had the joy of being an artilleryman.
On-board stuff, however, is NOT behind the lines. It is, at best a mile or two from the front. This means it is moved into position and relys on the battalion's or company's supply, not the regimental or divisional supply. These shells are stacked up, put in wagons and trucks to make them more mobile and put into the field -- for the game we call them Ammo trucks and Dumps, but real ammo dumps are miles behind the lines and can take up a quarter mile square area or more.
The game scale is tactical and much of what this discussion covers is, IMHO, more appropriatly considered Strategic. Still, there is merit to the questions.
I would ask bigtroutz about something else, however. If you consider the idea of limited ammo to be unrealistic, and therefor not prefered, do you also turn on the reduced squads? Rarely are platoons at 100 % strength when they go into battle. There is always someone who needed to go to sick call, is dealing with HQ for some piece of equipment that broke, on R&R, or out of the mix for a variety of reasons. These people are not replaced in the unit since they'll be back the next day or even later. If you insist on purity, I would think this is a must.
Sorry for the length of this, but it is an interesting look at gaming philosopy.
This is an estimate, but the amount of time spent in the average game is such that food is not an issue. A fully loaded infantryman can sustain an average speed of about 4 mph for an extended period of time. At 50 yds/hex a mile is about 35 hexes. Since a squad crosses about 4 clear terrain hexes per turn (and is shown moving 4 mph at that rate) we can estimate that it will spend 8.8 (round to 9) turns to move one mile -- therefor 8 to 10 turns is equal to 15 minutes! A 36 to 40 turn game is about one hour long. Just how many times will you need to eat in that time frame?
Ammo availability, on the other hand is a function of how much you can carry. Limitations are set for all the different units and in the space of one hour, firing constantly, you can empty what you have on hand fairly quickly. Replenishing the personal supply is an issue of getting to where there is more. I rarely have infantry units run out of all their ammo: grenades, smoke, etc, yes, but hardly ever do I run out of basic bullets.
AFVs do run out periodiclly, just as they did in RL, because they have limited storage space. Artillery, however, is something I have wondered about myself. Thing is, the off-board stuff is in the backfield and should have access to a considerable amount of ammo. In this I agree with bigtroutz and others -- I just can't see why you would assign an Artty battery to support an attack and then say you only get 50 rounds. I don't know how this works in RL since I have never had the joy of being an artilleryman.
On-board stuff, however, is NOT behind the lines. It is, at best a mile or two from the front. This means it is moved into position and relys on the battalion's or company's supply, not the regimental or divisional supply. These shells are stacked up, put in wagons and trucks to make them more mobile and put into the field -- for the game we call them Ammo trucks and Dumps, but real ammo dumps are miles behind the lines and can take up a quarter mile square area or more.
The game scale is tactical and much of what this discussion covers is, IMHO, more appropriatly considered Strategic. Still, there is merit to the questions.
I would ask bigtroutz about something else, however. If you consider the idea of limited ammo to be unrealistic, and therefor not prefered, do you also turn on the reduced squads? Rarely are platoons at 100 % strength when they go into battle. There is always someone who needed to go to sick call, is dealing with HQ for some piece of equipment that broke, on R&R, or out of the mix for a variety of reasons. These people are not replaced in the unit since they'll be back the next day or even later. If you insist on purity, I would think this is a must.
Sorry for the length of this, but it is an interesting look at gaming philosopy.
Challenge
War is unhealthy for die-stamped cardboard and other paper products.
War is unhealthy for die-stamped cardboard and other paper products.
Actually, I USED to set reduced squads on almost all the time until I adopted the almost universal practice of mech'ing my infantry. I find the 'predictable' numbers of troops to load easier when performing the calculations required to buy the right amount of mech. I have mech rangers, mech engr, mech airborne, mech bazooka, mech assault, etc etc now. I hate to 'waste' the space I paid so-much-for resulting from reduced squads on. In conclusion, i agree that reduced-squads-on is the correct choice for accuracy, however, it has little impact in actual gameplay. Contrast this with the poor rocket unit which fires once and is done.
There is little performance difference between a full complement squad (say 12 men) versus a reduced squad (say 10 men) in SWAW gameplay. I suppose once there have been casualties, there might be some difference, but not at start.
I agree the FOOD example is a stretch, but this was not the point. The point is that SPWAW ASSUMEs that ALL other logistics is working properly EXCEPT ammo when limited ammo is ON. Presumably, IF SWAW was modeled for ACCURACY TO REAL LIFE, the supression value would increase when the men couldn't change their skivvies or socks, went hungry or thirsty, didn't get mail, left their wounded behind to bleed to death, ran out of gas, got bit by chiggers cuz they forgot their deet, etc etc etc. My point is that if all of these other logistical items are being provided in the background, WHY would AMMO not be supplied as well. It does not compute (hehe).
In real life, all of these logistical functions are provided for troops as they fight (especially if you expect to succeed), even while they are attacking or defending, often in combination, eg mail, food and water is delivered with the ammo. Ammo supply was just one other aspect of logistical support, not separate, and not necessarily more important than another aspect when you consider logistics in aggregate.
There is little performance difference between a full complement squad (say 12 men) versus a reduced squad (say 10 men) in SWAW gameplay. I suppose once there have been casualties, there might be some difference, but not at start.
I agree the FOOD example is a stretch, but this was not the point. The point is that SPWAW ASSUMEs that ALL other logistics is working properly EXCEPT ammo when limited ammo is ON. Presumably, IF SWAW was modeled for ACCURACY TO REAL LIFE, the supression value would increase when the men couldn't change their skivvies or socks, went hungry or thirsty, didn't get mail, left their wounded behind to bleed to death, ran out of gas, got bit by chiggers cuz they forgot their deet, etc etc etc. My point is that if all of these other logistical items are being provided in the background, WHY would AMMO not be supplied as well. It does not compute (hehe).
In real life, all of these logistical functions are provided for troops as they fight (especially if you expect to succeed), even while they are attacking or defending, often in combination, eg mail, food and water is delivered with the ammo. Ammo supply was just one other aspect of logistical support, not separate, and not necessarily more important than another aspect when you consider logistics in aggregate.
Remember one thing..when your play a given scenario or a random battle...why people always assume that their rather small and insignificant collection of motley troops should have several arty batteries with unlimited ammo at their disposal????
And even if the offboard batteries have convoys of trucks carrying them ammo, why would they fire more than one fire ration, or whatever you call it in artillery, to support couple platoons of tanks and a company or two of infantry????
Voriax
And even if the offboard batteries have convoys of trucks carrying them ammo, why would they fire more than one fire ration, or whatever you call it in artillery, to support couple platoons of tanks and a company or two of infantry????
Voriax
Oh God give Me strength to accept those things I cannot change with a firearm!
Sorry, Voriax, this is a ridiculous oversimplification. Not only could a company/battalion call in battallion arty support, but often called in divisional arty. Here is what, for instance, a US company COULD use:Originally posted by Voriax
Remember one thing..when your play a given scenario or a random battle...why people always assume that their rather small and insignificant collection of motley troops should have several arty batteries with unlimited ammo at their disposal????
And even if the offboard batteries have convoys of trucks carrying them ammo, why would they fire more than one fire ration, or whatever you call it in artillery, to support couple platoons of tanks and a company or two of infantry????
Voriax
In mid 1944 (TO&E 7, dated 15 July 1943) the infantry division had 18 M3 105mm infantry howitzers, 36 M2 105mm howitzers, 12 M1 155mm howitzers, 5 halftracks, 13 M8 armored cars, 1,371 motor vehicles, and 10 light observation aircraft. Total personnel strength was 14,253.
The infantry regiment was organized with three battalions, twelve lettered companies (A-M, skipping J), an Infantry Cannon Company (first equipped with two halftrack-mounted 105mm howitzers and six halftrack-mounted 75mm howitzers or guns, and later with a towed short-barrelled 105mm howitzer), an Antitank (AT) Company (initially with twelve 37mm and later nine 57mm AT guns), and a Service Company. The fourth company in each battalion (D, H, M) were heavy weapons companies with sustained fire heavy machine guns and mortars. The regiment and each battalion also had a H&H Company. The regimental H&H Company included a Intelligence and Reconnaissance Platoon, the battalion H&H company included an Amunition and Pioneer (A&P, responsible for light engineering duties and for transporting ammunition forward to the line companies) Platoon and an AT Platoon (initially with four 37mm and later with 3 57mm AT guns).
ex ==> http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/ww ... fantry.asp
Thats 66 tubes of 105mm or larger, at the divisional level
8 tubes 75mm or larger at the regimental level
3 companies of weaps support (mortars)
plus whatever organic mortar or arty the company posessed.
While its true that a company might not have dedicated support from all of this arty, they certainly could and did use a portion of it when they needed it and it was available for a fire mission.
As far as WHY the support arty would fire more than a salvo in support? prolly cause they didnt want to get court-martialed for disobeying orders
Hello Bigtroutz
I'm glad you chose to use the word 'could use'. Now we just need to examine each nation separately and determine who was allowed to give firing orders to the support artillery.
What is certain that artillery has some kind of standing orders that determine how many rounds they will fire in a given situation and especially if the request for support does not come from dedicated artillery FO:s or from divisional HQ, for example.
Also there is the amount of ammo the unit should always have on hand, a 'fire ration'. This applies to just about all kinds of ammunition from pistols to artillery. An infantryman might be issued 2 fire rations before attack..this could be 60-120 rounds, depending of the type of weapon he's carrying.
For artillery this could be 40-100 rounds, depending of calibre. Let's say you have a 152mm howitzers...the round weight is around 40 kilos. Thus one fire ration weighs easily couple tons or more...this causes rather considerable logistic problems, especially with horse drawn transports.
So, an arty unit would have only few (2-3) fire rations at hand, and when that company commander calls from front line and yells 'fire everything you have at XX,YY' The arty will fire a certain portion of this fire ration and wait for further orders. If they'd fire all available ammo based on such order then there would be court-martials indeed.
Voriax
I'm glad you chose to use the word 'could use'. Now we just need to examine each nation separately and determine who was allowed to give firing orders to the support artillery.
What is certain that artillery has some kind of standing orders that determine how many rounds they will fire in a given situation and especially if the request for support does not come from dedicated artillery FO:s or from divisional HQ, for example.
Also there is the amount of ammo the unit should always have on hand, a 'fire ration'. This applies to just about all kinds of ammunition from pistols to artillery. An infantryman might be issued 2 fire rations before attack..this could be 60-120 rounds, depending of the type of weapon he's carrying.
For artillery this could be 40-100 rounds, depending of calibre. Let's say you have a 152mm howitzers...the round weight is around 40 kilos. Thus one fire ration weighs easily couple tons or more...this causes rather considerable logistic problems, especially with horse drawn transports.
So, an arty unit would have only few (2-3) fire rations at hand, and when that company commander calls from front line and yells 'fire everything you have at XX,YY' The arty will fire a certain portion of this fire ration and wait for further orders. If they'd fire all available ammo based on such order then there would be court-martials indeed.
Voriax
Oh God give Me strength to accept those things I cannot change with a firearm!
The limited ammo represents more than just the number of shells piled up, how many shells can you fire before the men drop out with exhaustion? How many turns in a row before the gun tube turns cherry red and starts whipping around as the metal softens.Originally posted by bigtroutz
I find the concept of limited Ammo in SPWAW a real stretch. Why not limited food, water, or limited POL (petrol, oil) etc.
As I have mentioned before, presumably a well prepared attack is, errr, well prepared, meaning they don't send out a company or battalion with only what they are carrying. We don't have support troops like field kitchens, intelligence, fuel dumps, field laundries, hospitals, and the hundreds of other services logistical troops provide so why do we have ammo trucks or dumps? We presume that all other logistical functions operate properly or at least minimally in the background, so why shouldn't ammo supply operate just as well.
I can see having limited ammo on in special cases, for a specific scenario perhaps, but as a general rule, it seems ridiculous. There is certainly enuf micro-managing in spwaw without it.
Certainly Monty never started an offensive or held a line without carefully preparing his logistical tail. Huge numbers of GA units were abandoned because of logistical problems (lack of POL, for instance) during the entire western front campaign that I have read about and I am sure this was also true for the Eastern front.
So, I hope I made my case for Limited Ammo OFF. Comments?
If an offboard battery has only 40 rounds perhaps that is modelled in to represent what they can do in the length of an average game, while still letting the unit fire brief bursts of more intense fire. They can't fire full steam for an hour.
I recall reading a while back that to more correctly represent what an infantry unit carried per man you should cut the ammo to 1/3 of what the game gives them. The extra ammo that a unit carries represents the in game distribution of ammo from in unit supply.
Of course the game also represents combat that is many times more intense than real combat, compressing a days combat into an hour.
If you rail against limited ammo, try reduced ammo like I play, then you start out only half full. Even out of ammo a unit can still capture vic hexes.
thanks, John.